About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
's always a joke when anybody talks about wielding more power out of elective office as a civilian than in elective office. it's a real help to the republicans in the senate because he has cost them the senate. he has done more damage to the senate and most especially to republicans in the senate than anyone else. he has backed these crazy, nutty tea parties who have gutted the republican nomination for senate in various states around the country, and then he went on to lose to democrats thereby preserving the democratic control of the senate, preserving harry he reed therei. he had become an absolute disaster within his own party. the big cheer today is in the republican caucus saying, finally, we're getting rid of our absolute craziest nut. >> very good. we congratulate them for that. another thing, lawrence, that happened today is governor bobby jindal wrote an op-ed in politico and he said, at present any reading the headlines over the past week indicates that republicans are fighting to protect the rich and cut benefits for senior. it may be possible to have worse political positio
then, this is it and i'm doing it for two more years and i'm going to run for re-election and make them go away for rich americans. that's not acceptable to the white house, $800 billion from so-called tax reform. >> well, steve, i mean, you put it sole well i don't know how to improve on that. that's my first reaction, is that the absence of any l giving any ground on the rates mean we haven't moved that far here. i think that that's the key sticking point here. you know, as a matter of -- a lot of what's happening here is a duel in public opinion and the media, who looks like they're reaching out and who gets blamed if things get ugly. i think the republicans are trying to put a veneer of specificity to look like they're -- i think obama did a good job in the last several days saying republicans rntd putting anything the on the table. they're trying to check that box, but the absence of any give on the rates just doesn't really move us that much closer. i also wonder on that $800 billion number without knowing what they say exactly, are they assuming any new revenue from economic grow
president obama gives his first post-election interview. who got the scoop? here's a hint. it wasn't us. i blame toure. >> i'm steve kornacki, more than aa million americans spanning all ages and races share one common belief. god is alive and well, but this isn't your parents' religious renaissance. >> na non-believer's prayers have been answered. doug dynasty invited me on a hunt, and i'm taking you all, too, today on "the cycle." >>> for those of you counting, it's just 27 days, eight hours and 59 minutes until the ball falls in times square. what did you think i was talking about? all those spending cuts and tax hikes that go into effect if washington doesn't make a deal. that means four more weeks of spinning our wheel of misfortune. where will it land today? follies. that's the perfect term. both sides miles apart. wall street remains optimistic a deal will be reached by january 1st. perhaps in a nod to investors, the president gave his first post-election interview today to none other than bloomberg tv. >> i think that we have the potential of getting a deal done, but it's g
with neil irwin, colonim columnist at "the washington post." when the election ended and looking aheadรง there's a conventional wisdom apparent in the coverage that, wow, to have this drama for a few months of the year, unsettle, roil the markets and not doing that and seems like the markets sort of telling us, you know, even if you go over the so-called cliff and down the gradual slope for a few days or weeks in january, that's not going to both earl us either. >> whyeah. there's a huge disconnect. there's almost a what me worry approach in the financial markets. these measures of volatility that predict the ups and downs to see are low. wall street isn't nervous right now and the interesting thing is it going to take panic on the markets to drive a deal? if you're a republican to vote for tax increases, entitlement cuts, does it take scary stuff on the markets to force you to action? >> so i guess your colleague at "the washington post" today, matt miller, wrote a column and looking at the possibility or the prospect of sort of a p perpetual fiscal cliff and using the debt ceiling t
or on trade policies to get our economy moving in spite of our elected officials? >> yeah. there's a lot of things to do with regard to wall street and the banks pulling back a little bit on dodd frank but not letting them off the hook. i think we need restructuring on wall street so as to get banks lending again and on trade policy, yeah. i mean, i know mr. romney lost the election, but i think he was right about the need to get tough with china. i think that would help up a lot. also, we should open up more offshore areas for drilling, produce more of our own oil, those kinds of things bring down the trade deficit a lot and create the ability to deal with our deficit more reasonably and still provide for people in a more reasonable way. >> so, jared, another area of concern is republicans are now threatening to use the debt ceiling again to basically take the country hostage again. yesterday i compared the debt ceiling -- >> when you talk about the debt ceiling you get very loud. >> i get very emotional. i don't know about that. i do get very emotional. i compared it it to physicianle
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)